Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-m9kch Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-25T13:37:57.827Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What do infants need an ownership concept for? Frugal possession concepts can adequately support early reasoning about distributive dilemmas

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 October 2023

Denis Tatone Open the ORCID record for Denis Tatone [Opens in a new window]
Denis Tatone*
Affiliation:
Department of Cognitive Science, Central European University, Vienna, Austria denis.tatone@gmail.com; https://denistatone.wixsite.com/my-site
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Boyer's model posits that ownership intuitions are delivered by combining input representations of resource conflict and cooperative value, necessary to solve coordination dilemmas over resource access. Here I evaluate the implications of this claim for early social cognition and argue that cognitively frugal possession concepts can be leveraged to the same inferential end, making the ascription of ownership proper unnecessary.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 46 , 2023 , e351
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Blake, P. R., & Harris, P. L. (2011). Early representations of ownership. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 132, 39–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geraci, A., & Surian, L. (2011). The developmental roots of fairness: Infants’ reactions to equal and unequal distributions of resources. Developmental Science, 14(5), 1012–1020.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ichikawa, M. (1995). Tool-use, cooperation and sharing among hunter-gatherer societies. Primate Research, 11(3), 231–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mascaro, O., & Csibra, G. (2012). Representation of stable social dominance relations by human infants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(18), 6862–6867.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sloane, S., Baillargeon, R., & Premack, D. (2012). Do infants have a sense of fairness? Psychological Science, 23(2), 196–204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stavans, M., & Baillargeon, R. (2019). Infants expect leaders to right wrongs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(33), 16292–16301.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tatone, D., & Csibra, G. (2020). Infants infer different types of social relations from giving and taking actions. In Denison, S., Mack, M. L., Xu, Y. & Armstrong, B. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 42nd annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp. 2981–2987). Retrieved from https://www.cognitivesciencesociety.org/cogsci20/papers/0748/0748.pdfGoogle Scholar
Tatone, D., Geraci, A., & Csibra, G. (2015). Giving and taking: Representational building blocks of active resource-transfer events in human infants. Cognition, 137, 47–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vorobyova, E. (2021). Infants’ understanding of cooperation. PhD dissertation. Retrieved from https://www.etd.ceu.edu/2021/vorobyova_elizaveta.pdf.Google Scholar
Wang, Y., & Henderson, A. M. (2018a). We cooperated so… now what? Infants expect cooperative partners to share resources. Infant Behavior and Development, 52, 9–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, Y., & Henderson, A. M. (2018b). Just rewards: 17-month-old infants expect agents to take resources according to the principles of distributive justice. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 172, 25–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar